As global energy conservation efforts increase and businesses and individuals seek to reduce utility costs and carbon footprints, low-power lighting systems have grown increasingly important. Advances in semiconductor lighting have enabled viable methods for achieving low-power lighting systems. Namely, light-emitting-diode (LED) lighting systems comprising LED light bulbs can significantly reduce power consumption relative to conventional light bulbs, while providing excellent lighting. Because cost concerns slow the transition from conventional to LED lighting systems, reducing the cost of implementing LED lighting systems will help facilitate the transition.
One cost driver of servicing LED lighting systems is unknown inventory requirements. The uncertainty stems from the interface between the LED light bulb and its power source. LED light bulbs may interface to power sources in one of several ways, including wedge interfaces and pin interfaces. In the conventional art, interface type is inextricably tied to bulb type. For example, a bi-pin interface requires a bi-pin bulb, and a wedge interface requires a wedge bulb. One challenge LED-lighting-system servicers face is that they do not know beforehand which bulb type—and, in the case of complex systems, how many of each bulb type—a given lighting system requires. And often times, in the case of complex lighting systems, or systems that are difficult to access, customers will not be able provide this information. Conventional workarounds to this challenge include carrying double inventory and performing pre-service inspections.
In the double-inventory solution, servicers compensate for unknown inventor requirements by carrying two types of bulbs in inventory: bulbs designed for wedge interfaces and bulbs designed for pin interfaces. This effectively forces servicers to carry twice the amount of inventory than they would carry if they knew the interface type in advance. The servicer can implement the double-inventory solution by carrying the extra inventory in a vehicle, thereby saving a trip to the service site. But this requires larger vehicle. Alternatively, the servicer can implement the solution by carrying the extra inventory in a building. But this requires more storage space. Either way, the double-inventory solution increases market entry cost, financial risk, and storage space requirements.
The pre-service-inspection solution provides an alternative to the double-inventory solution. In the pre-service-inspection solution, a servicer visits the system site to determine the type and number of bulbs required. After the inspection, the servicer can purchase required inventory, thus alleviating the storage space problem created by double inventory, described above. But while this solution solves the double-inventory problem, it introduces new problems.
For example, the servicer must make an extra trip to the site, increasing the time and cost of a given job. Even if the servicer makes this pre-service inspection, determining the number of each type of bulb may be very difficult in complex systems. Furthermore, because the servicer must wait to purchase inventory until after the pre-service inspection, the servicer must make an additional extra trip: to purchase inventory. Alternatively, in situations in which the servicer relies on shipped inventory, shipping costs increase because the servicer loses shipping economies of scale. Shipping also introduces time lags. So, like the double-inventory solution, the pre-service-inspection solution increases cost and risk.
Whether a servicer implements the double-inventory solution or pre-service-inspection solution, overcoming the challenge created by unknown inventory requirements increases the cost of servicing LED lighting systems. Importantly, the costs incurred through conventional solutions must typically be passed on to consumers, decreasing the overall incentive to transition to LED lighting systems.
Accordingly, there are a number of disadvantages in the conventional art of LED lighting solutions.